Stephen Hughes wrote:κιβώτιον is neuter, κιβωτός is feminine, your box has the masculine form ἐπικίνδυνος written on it.

I made it masculine because ἐπικίνδυνος in this context does not refer to the box (τὁ κιβώτιον). It refers to the contents within the box whose gender is unknown. The box is merely the container of what is ἐπικίνδυνος. Of course you could make an argument that even in this context neuter might be preferable.

My original comment was wrong. It is a two-termination adjective at this stage of the language. ἐπικίνδυνος is common gender.

Thank you, Stephen, for the addition of Μὴ ἅψαι τὸ κιβώτιον. Referring explicitly to the box (in addition to pointing to it) is a good idea. I'll adapt your suggestion as revised by Carl. I'll go with

Μὴ ἅψαι τοῦ κιβωτίου.
Μὴ ἅψασθε τοῦ κιβωτίου.

I would also like to thank you for the gracious way you made it clear that I had not made the optimal choice for the voice for ἅπτω! I must not have had enough sleep the night before. The verb is almost always middle or passive by the New Testament, and when it is active (Luke 8:16, 11:33, and 15:8, for example) it usually carries an implication of change or impact upon the thing touched. Middle voice is clearly a better choice for the context of this lesson.\

Actually the active ἅπτειν is causative, "bring something into contact with another" while the middle ἁπτεσθαι is intransitive, "come into contact." That distinction is not new to Koine. The active ἄπτειν is used of setting fire to a lamp, for instance.

Stephen:
Your exposition of the meaning of χρηματίζειν is wonderful. That's exactly what made me struggle with whether to word to use the word in the lesson. I am well aware of the range of usage of χρηματίζειν. It is not at all like the English word "warn", but is as you explain, a more neutral reference to a communication from a divine entity, spiritual power or authority. It is the negative nature of the revelation in this passage that makes "warn" a convenient translation. I just thought you might know of a word that you thought would work better in the exercise.

Please note that at no point in the lesson do I translate χρηματίζειν. I simply let the context communicate without translation. The context of the exercise does reflect a situation that actually occurs with this verb: a revelation that a particular course of action should not be taken. I do not mention the English word "warn" in the lesson, and it would be—as you suggest—misleading to do so.

Actually the active ἅπτειν is causative, "bring something into contact with another" while the middle ἁπτεσθαι is intransitive, "come into contact." That distinction is not new to Koine. The active ἄπτειν is used of setting fire to a lamp, for instance.

Right. Causation is a better way of describing the implication. I was drawing on my own reading of the verb in contexts where the causation generally yields some kind of result, such as the lamp being lit.

mwpalmer wrote:I just thought you might know of a word that you thought would work better in the exercise.

How do you perceive the warning to be taking place? Here are a few modes of communication within which a warning might be given that might be applicable.

If you the teacher themself is telling the students then use λέγειν.

If the teacher is telling the students to be careful based on what they have heard from others then use διαγγελεῖν.

If touching the box is an (ongoing) problem, and it would be better to not do it, then use νουθετεῖν.

If the teacher needs to explain what is going on, so the student themselves comes to the conclusion that they don't want to touch ("Let's say for a moment that you did touch the box... you would .... it would ..."), then they could use ὑποθεῖναι.

If the student is receiving divine guidance (requested or not) to touch or not, then χρηματίζειν.

If the teacher is bringing new information, then use γνωρίζειν for the teacher and γνῶναι for the students.

Louw and Nida's have προλέγειν and διαμαρτύρεσθαι in addition to νουθετεῖν.

I'm sorry to not be able to better answer your "might know of a word" question.

This error has been carried through unchecked from the first posting of the lesson plan.

I'm a little rusty with my accents, but I think the logic to be followed is something like this.

SINCE A word (or form of a verb) following the (innovative) recessive accent pattern, which has a long final syllable is paroxytone. AND An enclitic only throws back its accent when the word it follows is properisomenon or proparoxytone. CONSEQUENTLY An enclitic will not throw its accent back to a word following the recessive pattern with a final long syllable.

Χρηματίζω is a verb form that has adapted to the recessive accent pattern. Omega is a long syllable. THEREFORE σοι does not throw back its accent.

Anyway, whatever the logic or explanation, it should be Χρηματίζω σοι.

Stephen Hughes wrote:Anyway, whatever the logic or explanation, it should be Χρηματίζω σοι.

That's right. I remember the pattern in its negative formulation as enclitics do not throw an accent back on paroxytones (or perisponena), but in that case two-syllable enclitics (e.g. ἐστιν, τινα) will develop an accent on the ultima.